 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST Date: 05 Apr 02 - 03:19 PM WHY IS MUDCAT A PIECE OF SHIT? Because Max Spiegel provides space for motherfuckers to say to equate mass murdering terrorists with the victims of mass murdering terrorists. When Mudcat was a folk site it was great. This thread is a perfect example of why I hope Mudcat fails and Max loses every penny he has. Asta la vista Mudcat. |
|
Subject: Lyr Add: GALAXY SONG (Eric Idle & John Du Prez) From: GUEST Date: 05 Apr 02 - 03:21 PM THE COSMIC SONG Whenever life gets you down, Mrs. Brown, And things seem hard or tough, And people are stupid, obnoxious or daft, And you feel that you've had quite enough, Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving And revolving at nine hundred miles an hour. It's orbiting at nineteen miles a second, so it's reckoned, 'Round the sun that is the source of all our power. Now the sun, and you and me, and all the stars that we can see, Are moving at a million miles a day, In the outer spiral arm, at fourteen thousand miles an hour, Of a galaxy we call the Milky Way. Our galaxy itself contains a hundred billion stars; It's a hundred thousand light-years side to side; It bulges in the middle sixteen thousand light-years thick, But out by us it's just three thousand light-years wide. We're thirty thousand light-years from Galactic Central Point, We go 'round every two hundred million years; And our galaxy itself is one of millions of billions In this amazing and expanding universe. Our universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding, In all of the directions it can whiz; As fast as it can go, that's the speed of light, you know, Twelve million miles a minute and that's the fastest speed there is. So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure, How amazingly unlikely is your birth; And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere out in space, 'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth!
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: SharonA Date: 05 Apr 02 - 03:23 PM At the end of the Part 1 thread of this discussion, GUEST who posted on 05-Apr-02 - 12:35 PM said: "The rest of the world is vacillating between appeals to Israel "not to employ excessive force" and appeals to the Palestinians "to stop the terror." That wasn't my impression at all. I'm hearing the rest of the world making appeals to both sides to stop. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST Date: 05 Apr 02 - 03:35 PM "There is a minority of intellectual pacifists whose real though unadmitted motive appears to be hatred of Western democracy and admiration of totalitarianism. Pacifist propaganda usually boils down to saying that one side is as bad as the other but if one looks closely at the writings of younger intellectual pacifists, one finds that they do not by any means express impartial disapproval but are directed almost entirely against Britain and the US. Moreover they do not as a rule condemn violence as such, but only violence used in defense of Western countries." - George Orwell (in 1945), quoted in a letter to The Spectator
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST Date: 07 Apr 02 - 10:00 AM The Jews are pillaging Palestine, and the world is looking away. A few feeble-minded declarations and toothless resolutions notwithstanding, no one with the capability to say or do anything of substance seems to care. The people in the streets are loudly voicing their concern, but the silence in the halls of power is deafening. With a few exceptions, the Muslim regimes and media are looking to the West for assistance, for recognition of the plight of Palestine. Many are wondering why it is that the civilized Western world, with its much-vaunted love of peace and justice, is looking the other way. Why is it that "the world's only superpower" seems powerless to act? The problem is that these are all myths. The Western world loves neither peace nor justice, and it has a peculiar brand of civilization that has normalized its own crimes. For the West to condemn Israel the West must condemn itself, since Israel is the West, in somewhat concentrated form, but just as murderous, racist and virulent. Israel is too close to the standard Western colonial model of invasion, occupation and subjugation for the Western world to take any sort of action. Individuals may do otherwise, but political and economic powers are indifferent. Americans claim to lead the world today; that they are the "world's only superpower." America has also been the staunchest supporter of Israel since its inception in the mid-20th century. A quick look at America's history explains its complicity. European settlers with a Biblical ideology, amazingly close to present-day Zionism, invaded the Americas and destroyed the indigenous civilizations that had prospered there for centuries or millennia. New Americans paid no attention to the rights of local people, who were wantonly slaughtered and driven from their lands, or who died en masse of the diseases brought from Europe to the Northern American continent by the Europeans. But that is only one crime of the new Americans. Beside being built on the graves of millions of Native peoples in the eastern and central part of the continent, America was built on the backs of millions of Africans, kidnapped and worked to death in the new world to build and benefit the white man's paradise. This dual crime of genocide and enslavement was soon supplemented by a third, the systematic depopulation of what was once greater Mexico, the area now known as the southwestern United States, of its original inhabitants. The American colonial machine soon occupied all of what is now called the United States, and legalised and normalized the fruits of its crimes. Similar crimes were also committed elsewhere. The Spanish and Portuguese laid waste Central and South America and parts of Africa, in the name of a racist brand of Christianity fueled by the Church and a Crusader mentality. The French, Dutch, Belgians and Italians in particular invaded and occupied large areas of Africa and Southeast Asia, initiating colonial wars that took the lives of millions, all in the name of modern Western civilization. The British colonized half the planet, perfecting the practice of indirect rule, which, in combination with the usual slaughter and pillage, proved a lasting method of global subjugation that in many ways survives today. The formerly colonised regimes of the 'third world' are also largely silent about the crimes of the Jews in Palestine. This is because America and Europe have bribed and intimidated these regimes into silence. Economic sanctions, or their opposite in the form of subsidies, keep some of them from speaking, in a bizarre protection-racket funded by the IMF, the World Bank and other transnational economic organisations. The few states that speak out in favor of the Palestinian cause, such as South Africa and Lebanon, have been or will soon be attacked, either militarily or economically; others have been targeted in America's newest "war on terror." The Western world is living on the profits of its crimes, which are laid bare for all to see today by the Jews and their atrocious brutality in Palestine. The tortures, executions, internments and terrorism being perpetrated by the Jews today are no more than what America, Britain, France and other Western powers have done in their own past. Now they are "civilized" (ie. sophisticated, suave, and expert at blurring and confusing long-agreed and long-accepted human and ethical consensuses), and engage in polite and subtle conversations about peace and justice, but none of this would be possible without the crimes upon which Western civilization has been built. Where is the court to prosecute the perpetrators and perpetuators of this sordid legacy? There is no such court, because the entire modern legal system was effectively set up by these same criminals, so the judges, juries and executioners are all criminals too,or at least benefit from those crimes. One difference in the Jewish version of the Western colonial model is that its brutality is broadcast on television via various satellite networks. The US has tried hard to shut down these networks, but many still operate and even the Western media, hopelessly biased, are forced to show some of the reality to maintain their faltering 'objectivity'. But the blood and brutality on today's television screens are shadows of the centuries of atrocities committed by the Western powers in their own formative stages. Such images are not an aberration; they are the norm in a centuries-long colonial drive. It is foolish to expect anything else from the so-called civilized world today, which is being forced to look into an ugly mirror of its own terror, to gaze hatefully upon itself, and upon what it has wrought on the world. Israel is a lesson in colonial desperation. The former colonial powers cannot be called upon for guidance until they are willing to face their own legacies. Until then they will act like America, walking out of international forums such as the United Nations conference on racism in South Africa, proving their arrogance to the world by not facing up to their actions, preferring to continue to live on the profits of their crimes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: RichM Date: 07 Apr 02 - 10:32 AM If the Western world is responsible for all the political evils in the world, let's find some new role models. Let me see...Any arab nation--what about Iraq? Or what about the Far Eastern countries? India? Pakistan? India? Pakistan? Indonesia? They certainly knew how to resolve the East Timor situation. China? ---ignoring their handling of Tibet, of course. Nigeria, Algeria, Sudan? Southeast Asia? Oh, the alternatives are endless...as long as it's not any of those horrible western countries! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: Big John Date: 07 Apr 02 - 11:16 AM "His blood be upon us and our children". This is a line in the Gospel allegedly used by the Jews demanding the crucifiction of Jesus. It has been used for 2000 years as justifcation for the persection of Jews culminating in the Holocost. The Jews learned from that experience that military might is the only road to survival. They are now totally surrounded by hostile "neighbours". I think the murder of 6 million of their people gives them reason to be paranoid about their continued survival. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST Date: 07 Apr 02 - 12:05 PM I agree they have reason to be paranoid, Big John. But what they don't have the right to do is to act out their fears by punishing their new neighbors with military repression, massacres, and state sponsored terrorist tactics like political assassinations, illegal round-ups and detentions, censoring the international media, etc etc. The state of Israel has the same rights of security any sovereign nation has, but not more of a right to security than is allowed by international law. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 07 Apr 02 - 01:05 PM Now on the face of it GUEST 05-Apr-02 - 03:19 PM is probably not the same as GUEST 07-Apr-02 - 10:00 AM. But is GUEST 07-Apr-02 - 12:05 PM the same as GUEST 05-Apr-02 - 03:35 PM or GUEST 05-Apr-02 - 03:21 PM?
Or maybe it really is all the same GUEST who thinks that a bloody tragedy like this is a fine playpen in which to play silly games. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST Date: 08 Apr 02 - 06:43 AM Look into the USA Bashing thread and you will find a couple terrorists in the making. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST Date: 08 Apr 02 - 08:51 AM The US also compensates the families of it's soldiers killed in the line of duty. I view US soldiers as perpetrators of violence too. After all, we pay our soldiers to go to foreign lands and kill innocent people as standard operating procedure. Yet few Americans question those incentives we give to our enlisted men to commit acts of violence. When we give a paycheck, subsidized housing, food, medical care, etc. to soldiers, that is quite the financial incentive for them to be violent, and reward them for terrorist acts against innocent civilians in Afghanistan, or Iraq, or anyway we decide we have a so-called "national interest". Why the double standard? If you don't like what Palestinian terrorists are doing, why do you accept what the Israeli terrorists are doing as A Good Thing? Or US terrorists? Because we can't scare you, you're stickin' with the empire 'til the day you die? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: Little Hawk Date: 08 Apr 02 - 05:13 PM Both the Israelis and the Palestinians have plenty of reasons to be paranoid, and to arm themselves. The terrorists are: whoever goes onto someone else's ground with the intention of committing violence or fires across someone else's border or flies through someone's else's air and drops bombsd, and does violence upon the people there and destroys their property and lives. The non-terrorist is: he who defends his own ground against the attacker (such as the Israeli policeman or soldier on the streets of Tel Aviv or the Palestinian fighter on the streets of Ramallah or Nablus). So...the Palestinian bomber is a terrorist, the Israeli soldier in the streets of Nablus is a terrorist, the guy firing a rocket from Lebanon into Israel is a terrorist, the guy who bulldozes down a Palestinian house is a terrorist, and Arafat and Sharon are terrorists...to one extent or another. People will argue that extent, depending on their pre-existing state of prejudice. If they are totally blinded by prejudice and fear, they will see terrorists only on one side of the issue. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST Date: 13 Apr 02 - 02:29 AM Judging from the commercials
They are you, and me, and anyone else who puffs a bowl of pot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST Date: 13 Apr 02 - 10:01 AM by Daniel Gordis of Jerusalem
Tuesday was Yom Hashoah, Holocaust Remembrance Day, an agonizing day. In the afternoon, at work, we gathered in a circle while some colleagues quietly read the names of relatives who had been exterminated by the Nazis. Some had long lists; one even brought pictures. During the ceremony, word spread that a group of Israeli Defense Force soldiers — 13, it would turn out — had been killed in an ambush in Jenin. Another, in Nablus, fell to friendly fire. It is hard to describe what 14 soldiers means in this small country. People make frantic calls to find out where their husbands and fathers are. Then the hourly news announces to the entire country the location and time of each funeral. At such moments it feels that living here makes one part of an extended family. No one in that family wants this war. But very few people here think we can do without it. Israelis understand why we're fighting. We also know why our soldiers are dying. There are significant pockets of armed resistance in the Jenin camp, but there are also lots of civilians. So we can't just bomb from the skies. We send soldiers house to house, only to watch as Hamas fighters use those same civilians as shields. On Tuesday we paid a heavy price. We had 14 funerals because we won't fight this war the way the Russians fought in Grozny or the way the United States fought in Afghanistan — from the safety of the skies. Hardly a building in Grozny was spared in the bombing; the Russians knew the price they'd pay if they tried to fight on the street. If Israel hit a hospital from the skies the way that the Americans did not too long ago in Afghanistan, just imagine the world's reaction. Palestinians say we won't let their ambulances in Jenin. Yet two weeks ago Israeli soldiers stopped a Palestinian ambulance with a child in the back on a stretcher, and under him soldiers found an explosive belt. Palestinians say that we're not letting them clear their dead from the streets. The Israeli Army claims that's a lie, that the Palestinians are leaving the bodies there intentionally for good footage on CNN. Who's telling the truth? I don't know. Last week, when the siege around the Church of the Nativity began, many Israelis understood why we couldn't just shoot our way in, but the frustration was palpable. If it had been Israelis in a church, or a synagogue, and Palestinians on the outside, how long would the siege have lasted? Everyone here knows the answer. When the Palestinians burned down the synagogue at Joseph's tomb in October 2000, the Vatican didn't speak up. When they later destroyed an ancient synagogue near Jericho, European liberals didn't lose sleep. The siege outside the church began in foul weather. According to reports on Israeli radio, some soldiers stood for hours in the driving rain, making sure that none of the armed Palestinians inside would escape. All that afternoon, the residents of Bethlehem pointed at the rain and shouted: "Get out of here. We hate you. The world hates you. And look, even the heavens hate you." Maybe the world does hate us for having the audacity to protect ourselves, for meaning it when we say "never again." Maybe the world is secretly delighted that no war can be made to look civilized, so the Europeans and the Palestinians can point their fingers at us and say, "See, they do it, too." Then maybe what they did won't seem so horrific, so unforgivable. One thing important to Jews is remembering. We won't forget the 20th century and the world's complicity, and when we recall this week, in which we buried 14 of our sons, brothers, husbands and fathers who didn't have to die except for our decision to do this fighting the hard way, we'll remember the world's double standard. On Tuesday night, my 12-year-old son, Avi, told me about a Yom Hashoah class discussion about whether the Holocaust could happen again — a session he said he found "stupid." Why? I asked. "Because we have a strong army," he answered, "America is our friend, and look out there now — we take care of ourselves." The next morning I watched him head off on his bike to school, with pride, security and confidence. That's a lot more than Jewish kids in Europe had a few decades ago. It's a lot more than some Jewish kids have in Europe this week. It's why we need this country. And it's why we'll fight to keep it.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 13 Apr 02 - 12:36 PM Demonizing and dehumanizing the Palestinians won't bring back those who died at the hands of the Nazis.
However, demonizing and dehumanizing the Palestinians could very well earn Sharon and his government a place beside some of the other prominent historical mass murderers. Listen to Yossi Beilin. He remembers a time when Israel was more willing to work with the Palestinians, and Israeli Jews could travel freely into Palestinian towns without fear for their safety. Sharon is betraying the Israelis Jews. And they will share the shame of his crimes against humanity when they are brought to light. Hell of a thing when you think about it, considering what the State of Israel was created for in the first place. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 13 Apr 02 - 01:13 PM And apparently the truth is already coming to light. Today the bodies of whole families of Palestinians; men, women, and children, have been uncovered in the ruins of their homes that were buldozed by the Israeli military. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 13 Apr 02 - 02:06 PM The most dangerous weapon you can have is a human being who is ready and willing to die. Bombs, guns, explosives, they can be obtained anywhere. But people who are willing to die aren't found quite so easily. They can be created slowly by a process of re-education. Or they can be created en masse by the kind of thing that has been happening in the occupied territories over the past two weeks.
The idea that somehow a massive assault on Palestinian ghettos is going to help stop suicide bombers is just a fantasy. It is creating more potential bombers all the time. All that is achieved by "destroying the terrorist infrastructure" is ensuring that there is no way that anyone on the Palestinian side can do anything to stop the suiciders, even if they want to.
The British thought in those terms when they introduced internment in Northern Ireland. All it did was to unleash a new young generation of bombers.
When Napoleon arranged for a political killing of an opponent a critic said "It's worse than a crime - it's a mistake." People who go on about what Israel is doing as wicked miss the point. "It's worse than a crime - it's a mistake." (And of course the same is true of the suicide bombings.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 13 Apr 02 - 02:28 PM Unless Sharon's real agenda is to ethnically cleanse all Palestinians from Israel. In which case, I suppose his methods could be very effective in stopping the suicide bombers. Because then there won't be an Palestinians left in Israel. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 13 Apr 02 - 02:40 PM Of course, ethnically cleansing Palestinians would probably cause a whole lot of other problems with the other countries in the region. But hey, that's what nuclear weapons are for, right? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: Troll Date: 13 Apr 02 - 03:20 PM Ten Tips on How to Be an Arafat Apologist FrontPageMagazine.com | April 11, 2002 WITH ALL OF THE EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE that has now confirmed, beyond any reasonable doubt, Arafat's terrorist connections and duplicitous behavior vis-à-vis Israel, it has become impossible for Arafat's apologists to make any legitimate excuses for their hero. I know a number of academics and writers that have become extremely depressed because of this situation. Having based their entire lives and professional careers on blaming Israel for any and every sparrow that fell from the sky, they have now lost the will to live. I feel sorry for these pathetic people. I have decided to come forward to help the individuals who want to continue championing Yasser Arafat but simply don't know how. Seeing that I have dedicated most of my adult life to observing and dissecting the psychotic mindset that it takes to blame Israel for the conflict in Palestine, I know exactly what it takes to be an Arafat supporter. Even in these difficult times, I can teach an individual how to effectively defend Arafat and the Palestinian Authority –- even if the entire charade is filled with specious nonsense and lies. I have created ten tips on how to be an Arafat apologist. They come with an easy to follow step-by-step guide. All you have to do is fertilize your personal dedication to anti-Semitism and then simply allow yourself to become as delusional as humanly possible. The video infomercial for these tips should be coming out next month on television stations across the United States. Meanwhile, here is the basic outline for all those Jew-haters who have dedicated their lives to blaming Israel for every Arab terrorist act but thought that doing so was no longer possible: Tip #1 – Imagine that the Palestinians are fighting for a homeland that was taken away from them by the evil Jews. That's right. The foundation to becoming and remaining a faithful pro-Arafat enthusiast is to intoxicate yourself with the belief that the Palestinians actually once owned a homeland that was, in turn, stolen by the greedy and parasitic Jews. While trying to convince yourself of this fantasy, ignore the historical fact that the Palestine Mandate was never a nation, let alone even a political entity of any kind. It was a "mandate" that was created by the British from the remnants of the Turkish Empire after World War I. 10% of it was given to the Jews and 90% was given to the Palestinian Arabs. The key here is that you should never worry about where 90% of Palestine actually is. Just obsess with the miniscule tiny bit of land that the Israelis "occupy" now. It's not important that this land was never officially "owned" by anyone in the first place. You should also never reflect on whether all of your rage and hatred on this issue is proportional to the fact that Israel consists of 1% of the land in the Middle East. Just get really angry that Israel is on territory that you think should be given to the Palestinians. And because you think this, then it automatically makes it right and historically correct. You should never wonder how your moral indignation on this issue fits with your complete indifference to the fact that Jordan occupies 80% of the land that made up the original Palestine Mandate. So if you really cared about the Palestinians, you would obviously be focusing your energy on protesting the crime being perpetrated by the Jordanians against the Palestinians. But the key here is that, well, deep down, you don't really care about the Palestinians -– and neither should you. You must never admit this, but the Palestinians are only there for you to cynically exploit as pawns in your contributory effort to finish off what Adolph Hitler started. That's right. You know what I'm talking about. And even the Palestinians are in on this with you. I mean, think about it: if the Palestinians themselves really cared about getting a homeland, don't you think that they would be screaming about -- and fighting for -- the land that Jordan occupies? Don't you think it is somewhat curious that Jordan has never, even for a second, been the target of a Palestine liberation movement? Don't you think it is a little bit curious that, in 1948, the Palestinian Arabs rejected an international resolution that would have established a Palestinian state, and instead focused all of their energies on destroying the new Jewish state? You're starting to get the picture now, right? So be a smart and clever Arafat apologist. The overall objective of your life should be facilitating the killing of Jews and destroying the state of Israel. The last thing you should be doing is worrying about the Palestinians. At the same time, however, in terms of what you actually say in public, you must always discuss the Middle East "problem" on the assumption that you are agonizing over the Palestinians' plight and how their entire "homeland" somehow lies in tiny little Israel. It is also a very good idea that you always refer to the myth of how the Jews "stole" the Palestinian "homeland" in passing, because then it makes its reality appear to be a given. You can't believe how effective this ploy can be, especially in the midst of people who know nothing about Middle East history. So believe in yourself and just do it! Tip #2 – Never question the cause of Palestinian terror. Every time that a Palestinian blows himself up along with innocent Jewish civilians, including babies in carriages, you should shake your head in despair and say things like, "That poor Palestinian. But he simply had no choice. The Israelis have pushed his people beyond their means." You should always say things like this with a tone that implies that the "Israeli occupation" is the most oppressive reality in the world. Say things like, "The Israelis are doing to the Palestinians what the Nazis did to them." Follow this up with sentences like, "The Jews have obviously forced the Palestinians into terrorism." When you mouth these slogans, make sure to have a serious and sincere look on your face, otherwise the asininity of what you are saying might become more easily discernable. Maintaining a sober facial expression can be made easier if you convince yourself that the wars of 1973 and 1967 are irrelevant to the subject at hand. Before Israel was attacked in 1973, it occupied less of the land that is now in dispute, and before 1967, it occupied none of it. In other words, the Arab terror that was unleashed against Israel in 1967 had nothing to do with the Israeli "occupation" of the West Bank and Gaza Strip because the "occupation" did not exist. From 1949-1967, Jordan had occupied the West Bank while Egypt controlled the Gaza Strip. But instead of the Arabs using terror against Egypt and Jordan to get them off of the Palestinians' "land,", an Arab war of terror against Israel was launched in 1967. Israel won that war and grabbed both the West Bank and Gaza Strip as a security measure. So why is it, you think, that Jordan's annexation of the West Bank and Egypt's annexation of the Gaza Strip from 1949-67 didn't trigger any emotions in the Palestinians who lived in those territories? Why is it that not once, in all of those 18 years, was there even a sentence of indignation uttered by the Palestinians or by their "liberation" organization about the injustice done to the inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza Strip? Why did other Arab states say nothing about it? You know why. And this means that the terror against Israel has always been, and still is, caused by something other than Israelis being on any kind of "territory." I'll give you six hints about what the real cause is connected to: Hint #1: Hitler formulated the Final Solution because of it. Hint #2: it has something to do with why Israel cannot be found on a map in Palestinian geography classes. It's also connected to why Palestinian textbooks teach Palestinian children that Jews are evil thieves who have taken Arab land and who must therefore be killed. The textbooks also tell the kiddies that suicide bombing is what Allah loves most, since that noble and holy activity is the most effective way of murdering Jews and "liberating" Palestine. Hint #3: it's why the Palestinian Authority has published the Arabic translation of Mein Kampf, and why that tract has reached number six on its best-seller list. Hint #4: It is connected to why, in 1960, when the Israelis captured Adolph Eichmann, the government-run Saudi Arabian newspaper ran a story headlined: "Arrest Of Eichmann, Who Had The Honor Of Killing Six Million Jews." Hint #5: it has something to do with the great honor and respect that is bestowed in the Middle East upon anyone who succeeds in killing Jews. For instance, if you blow yourself up along with some innocent Jewish mothers and babies, your picture will be plastered on posters throughout your hometown. Your family will acquire a revered place in society and will also receive $25,000 in American currency from Saddam Hussein. You, meanwhile, will get to fulfill all of your wildest and repressed sexual fantasies with 72 virgins in heaven. Hint #6: the whole matter is related to why Hashemi Rafsanjani, the eminent representative of "Iranian moderation," has boasted that once the Muslim world gets a hold of nuclear weapons, which he assures will be very soon, the Jewish "question" will be solved forever. Now that you know what the real cause of Palestinian terror is, make sure to always deny it. Instead, consistently maintain to others that it is the result of Israelis being on "Palestinian territory." Tip #3 – Ignore the words of Palestinians. When you make your arguments for the Palestinian right to a homeland, always make sure to emphasize that the Palestinians acknowledge the right of Israel to exist. To make sure this works effectively, never mention, or ever even think about, what the Palestinians actually say themselves. For instance, never talk about the Palestinian Covenant of 1968, because it embodies the philosophical principles of the Palestinians themselves and says things that would shatter the foundation to all of your arguments. For instance, Article 19 affirms that, "The partition of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of Israel is fundamentally null and void, whatever time has elapsed, because it is contrary to the wish of the people of Palestine and its natural right to its homeland." Article 15 states that, "The liberation of Palestine, from the Arab viewpoint, is a national duty to repulse the Zionist, Imperialist invasion from the great Arab homeland and to purge the Zionist presence from Palestine." Also ignore Articles 20 and 22, because they reject even the historical and religious ties of Jews to the Holy Land itself. And that is precisely why Palestinian children are yet to find the state of Israel on any maps in their geography classes. You also shouldn't worry that Arafat has never repudiated the Articles in the Palestinian Covenant of 1968. This explains why, when speaking English to Western audiences, he always talks about how he acknowledges the right of Israel to exist. But when he speaks Arabic to Arab audiences, he does little else but boast about his successes in working toward the Palestinians' most ambitious goal: to destroy the state of Israel. One only has to briefly listen to the Arab media, mosque sermons, and classroom and cafe conversations to gauge that this disposition represents a wide consensus in Arab society in general and in Palestinian society in particular. Thus, when you are trying to persuade someone about the good intentions of Arafat and the Palestinian Authority, and how they accept the existence of Israel, never mention what the Palestinians themselves talk about. You should most definitely stay away from the subject of the 1968 Palestinian Covenant, because this could cause you problems. If someone else brings it up, change topics immediately. Tip #4 – Imagine that Palestinians were, and are better off without Israel and the Israeli "occupation." You should be constantly angry about the suffering of Palestinians and be convinced that it is the fault of Israel. Palestinian suffering should always be equated with Israeli responsibility. These two notions must be inseparable in your mind. Palestinian suffering is definitely not the fault of Arafat or of all the Arab states – even though they have done everything in their power to make sure that the Palestinians do not receive a homeland. That's right. So try not to reflect too much on why the Palestinians of the West Bank are barred from becoming citizens in the Arab world. When the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian administration, for instance, the Palestinians there were denied Egyptian citizenship and thereby remained stateless. This is exactly why the Palestinians are known as "refugees." The Arabs love their Palestinian brothers. It's just that, well, they love them from a distance. In any case, you should try your hardest to convince yourself that the Palestinians' life under the Israeli "occupation" is the worst experience of any people under any regime in the history of the human race. The first step to believing this notion is to ignore the fact that Palestinians are much worse off in occupied Lebanon, where they are denied basic rights to employment, healthcare and government services –- unlike the Palestinians in Israel and in the "occupied" territories. You should also avoid the subject of how Kuwait ethnically cleansed all Palestinians (about 300,000 of them) just a decade ago, and how Jordanians slaughtered thousands of them after the 1967 war. Try to imagine that all of this isn't very relevant. And neither is the fact that the world community never said too much about these Arab atrocities. It's okay when Muslim Arabs practice genocide against Palestinians. It's only wrong when the Israelis oppress Palestinians in the effort to defend themselves from terror. You also shouldn't stress yourself about the racism against Arabs that this whole double standard implies. Indeed, by holding Jews up to a higher moral accountability than Arabs, the view that lets Arabs off the hook for oppressing their own brethren implies a civilizational inferiority to them -- and a civilizational superiority to Jews. But don't think through this too much. You might get depressed after realizing that, deep down, just like a Leftist despises the "underclass" people for whom he purports to speak, so too you have smug contempt for the Arabs that you believe you represent in your self-alienated imagination. The key, in general, is that you should just avoid the whole issue of how the Jews have treated the Palestinians much better than the Arabs have. It is also a very good idea for you to ignore the fact that Israel has given birth to an Arab citizenry inside Israel of more than one million people. This way you won't have to wonder how it is that, as Israeli citizens, Arabs have more rights, privileges and opportunities than the citizens of any Arab state in the Middle East. Unlike their Arab brothers and sisters, Arab citizens in Israel vote in free elections and are themselves elected to the Israeli parliament. In other words, the only place where Arabs know democracy and a high standard of living is in a Jewish nation. This is a hard pill to swallow for a person like you, who aspires to demonize Israel and to glorify the Arab world as the embodiment of true democracy and stupendous progress in world civilization. So what you have to do is visualize images of how Israel is the most evil nation on the face of the earth and how Arabs and Palestinians have endured unspeakable suffering because of it. Tip #5 – Imagine that Israel controls the "occupied" territories for some bizarre, vague and sinister reason. That's right: imagine that Israel controls the "occupied" territories because Jews have nothing better to do than to inflict pain. They think it's in their interest to trigger terrorism against themselves, as well as to ignite the hatred of a large portion of the world's population. With great moral indignation, you should say things like, "the Israelis need to get out of the occupied territories." Say this as if it is a really easy, simple and safe thing for the Israelis to do. Never consider that the Israeli "occupation" of the territories in question might actually not be the greatest crime in world history. It might also not deserve immediate rectification. Sometimes land is confiscated when aggressive and terrorist states repeatedly attack their neighbors -- and lose. But this should not be your concern. What should be your concern is to say things that make Israel look as if it controls areas like the West Bank because Israelis need to fill the void of no longer being allowed to sacrifice and eat gentile babies in their religious rituals. Tip #6 – Say that Arafat isn't a terrorist. You should always say things like: "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom-fighter." After that, say things like, "Arafat is a freedom-fighter." You must always ignore that Arafat has provided sanctuary and support to Palestinian suicide bombers and terrorists of all stripes. Be very open-minded about how he has personally endorsed suicide bombings rhetorically and celebrated the cult of "martyrdom" and other forms of homicide. And always make sure to announce things like, "Arafat has imprisoned militants." When you say this, don't worry that the Palestinian "jails" that Arafat places "militants" in are notorious for their bars in the front and revolving doors at the back. Just tell people that Arafat is really trying to get terrorism under control. Don't lose any sleep over the fact that explosives of the specific type used by Palestinian suicide bombers have been found in Palestinian police stations all over the "occupied" territories. Also don't concern yourself with the fact that 500 Palestinians were just recently arrested in and around Arafat's compound and that dozens of them were on Israel's lists of most-wanted terrorists. Arafat was obviously still trying his best to track these people down. The reason he couldn't find them was that they were cleverly hiding in his office while he was desperately patrolling the West Bank looking for them. And by all means, deny to others, as well as to yourself, that connections between the Palestinian Authority and international Islamic terror organizations, including al-Qaeda, have now been established beyond any reasonable doubt. If you accept this reality, then your whole belief system will come crashing down. Just look really sure of yourself and say things like, "Arafat isn't a terrorist. He is a freedom fighter." Tip #7 – Imagine that Arafat has the interests of his own people in mind. This is the key to being an effective apologist for Arafat. You must always tell people that your hero truly cares about his own people –- even though the history of his every move negates the possibility of this being the case. A person that truly wanted the best for the Palestinian people would have embraced an offer that accepted 95% of the Palestinians' negotiating demands and would have given the Palestinians their own sovereign state in Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip, more than 90 percent of the West Bank, and a capital in Jerusalem. That's what Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered Arafat in 2000. But Arafat rejected the proposal, demanding, instead, the flooding of Israel with millions of Palestinians. He knew, as Israelis did, that such a development would destroy Israel as a Jewish state. Arafat shrewdly understood that Israel could not, and would not, engage in self-destruction and this is how he succeeded in his main objective: to avoid the creation of a new Arab state and to annihilate the only Jewish one. That's what the "Palestinian uprising," after all, is really all about. It is obvious, therefore, why Arafat has consistently stifled all Israeli efforts to improve the prosperity of the Palestinian people. He wants his people to bleed in misery and destitution. That way their suffering can be exploited in the Arabs' suicide wars against Israel. Now the key for you, therefore, is to deny the obvious. You know that the "Palestinian problem" is far more useful to Arafat than its solution will ever be. Arafat knows that peace with Jews is his own political suicide at best –- and his own death warrant at worst. What you have to do is look people in the eyes as honestly as you can and say things like, "Arafat is really trying to help his people." Say this as if you yourself have been talking to Arafat and that he tells you things that he wouldn't confide in most people. Tip #8 – Say that Arab terrorism has nothing to do with jealousy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 13 Apr 02 - 03:24 PM All glibness aside, when the bodies start being counted, and the numbers of innocent Palestinian's who have been killed becomes known, I think it will become a lot more difficult to be a Sharon apologist. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: Little Hawk Date: 13 Apr 02 - 04:10 PM I repeat, anyone who thinks that one side is all right in the Middle East and the other is all wrong is blinded by prejudice. Both sides are deeply bigoted against each other, and both are committing terrorism against each other on a regular basis, but they only call it terrorism when the other guy does it. A victory they win is a "victory"...a victory the other guy wins is a "massacre". Look back to the wars in America between the USA and the Native people, and you will see these same habits of expression used...depending on whose prejudice is engaged in making the statement. Be that as it may, I appreciate some of the points in the Daniel Gordis article...particularly regarding the hypocrisy of the West, which happily bombs the hell out of people from a safe distance...then criticizes other people for doing it at close range, which is far more dangerous to the attacker's fighting forces. The fact is, all the parties who go out and commit violence do it in whatever way seems most effective (and politically feasible) to them in achieving their desired objective! They do not do it with humanitarian concerns in mind. If Israel thought that they could achieve their objectives through air bombing alone, I'm sure they would follow that method. If the Palestinians thought they could achieve their objectives through conventional combat in the open, that's what they would do too. Likewise for the Arab states. So it goes...each one does what he thinks will WORK, under the present circumstances. It's pragmatism, folks, pragmatism, although it's unrealistic pragmatism in my opinion, because it will not achieve the desired objective...not in either case. It will merely add more fuel to the fire. The USA is now beginning to get seriously worried about this particular fire, I believe...I wonder if they will find a way to put it out? Or has Pandora opened a box that cannot be shut this time? - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: artbrooks Date: 13 Apr 02 - 04:13 PM CarolC, I'd like the cite for your statement about bodies and bulldozers, please. I cann't find that on CNN or other sources I trust. My personal opinion of Mr. Sharon is that he and Mr. Begin are running a close race for the worse Israeli PM since 1948. That being said, and I think what's happening in the "refugee camps" right now is tragic, I don't see a decent solution. Arafat doesn't control the Palestinians, and there is nobody for the Israelis to talk to. If ANYBODY negotiates any kind of agreement with Arafat, one of the other factions will murder another dozen Israeli children with a "suicide bomb"...and maybe the bomber will be a Palestinian child...and that agreement will die. If the Israelis pull out of the supposedly Palestinian controlled territories the bombing will continue...it always has in the past. If the Israelis leave the West Bank and Gaza entirely, and accept the Saudi plan to withdraw to the 1967 "borders", then the Arab nations will shell across the border...they always have in the past. Most of northern Israel is within artillery range of the Golan Heights, and Tel Aviv is within artillery range of the 1967 border. Got a solution? I don't. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST,mgarvey@pacifier.com Date: 13 Apr 02 - 04:35 PM I am not an apologist for Arafat or his henchmen. I would love to see them removed from society..house imprisonment with no communication at all..And I do think that the suicide bombers forced a military response, but I don't know if that means bulldozing people alive in their homes....you can tell people to come out while you search their homes for weapons...and I read on a message from Christians in Palestine that children were screaming for water and being forced to drink sewage water... I heard a Palestinian man on the radio say something I think was profound..he wasn't speaking for the whole lot of them..but he said he didn't care if he lived in Israel's land..he wanted his old home and orchards back. I think we are not realizing the attachment to the physical land that was taken, liberated, however you want to call it. It comes through loud and clear in everything you read. I think the desire for a state is secondary..I don't think I realized that until recently. I also read or heard somewhere, and maybe I bookmarked it, that 86% of the villages that were "liberated" were empty. That stunned me. It means at least some could return..maybe as serfs..who knows....I know all the arguments..but encouraging millions more people to activate their "right of return" or the similar phrase that is used..I forget what it is..to Israel, and at the same time denying it to Palestinians..is nuts...maybe they should be allowed ...some of them..to return on a migrant basis but not really live there..just to farm it...I don't know...I also wonder if the Gaza strip could be exchanged for land in the north and more of a north/south split could happen..with the Palestine land adjoining Syria rather than Israel..and Israel sharing borders with the more moderate countries of Egypt and Jordan, with an occupied area in Palestine..not occupied solely by Israeli troops. International. With Jerusalem heavily international..probably not a capitol of either country but a religious capitol for the world..with tons of tourist s bringing in money...geographers and economists...can better lines be drawn than have been suggested by all the powers? mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 13 Apr 02 - 04:44 PM artbrooks, I heard it from people who were there when it happened. I think you'll be hearing a lot more from such people, and if Israel would allow independent observers in to very these things, we could say that the body counts have been conducted without bias. Of course, if they don't, then we'll know that they have something to hide. Especially if they go buring the bodies themselves. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 13 Apr 02 - 04:49 PM "They always have in the past" And in the past, Israel has always reneged on its agreements with the Palestinians. If they had been honoring their agreements, the suicide bombings would not have been happening. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 13 Apr 02 - 05:04 PM One reason why the allegations about houses being flattened with families inside them are being treated as credible is because that is exactly what happened in the first serious war crime alleged against Sharon, back in 1953 in the village of Qibya.
The strenuous efforts made by the attacking forces in Jenin to keep away any outside observers have also fed suspicions. And have made it a lot harder to disprove the suspicions, if they are ungrounded. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST Date: 13 Apr 02 - 05:48 PM From the Jewish Man's official dating manual: Never dump a cute little shiksa. Otherwise, you run the risk of creating deep bitterness toward all Jewish people and the State of Israel. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 13 Apr 02 - 05:56 PM I assume that's a reference to me. Well, the truth of the matter is, he didn't dump me, and I am not bitter toward all Jewish people.
I am however, pretty upset with the current Israeli government. And I think that's a pretty appropriate thing for me to be. And you, too. Anyway, the suggestion that if a person strongly disagrees with the current government of Israel, they are bitter toward Jewish people in general is not only specious, it's also insideous, and does not help the Jewish cause any more than it helps the Palestinian cause. If I pretended to agree when I don't, I would be coddling all Jewish people. I, personally, don't know any Jews who like being coddled. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST Date: 30 Apr 02 - 01:18 PM Mea culpa Following the latest atrocity in Jerusalem, Secretary Powell pleaded with the Palestinians to issue some form of denunciation. Arafat complained that only the Palestinian side is ever required to denounce terror. Predictably, the Palestinian denunciation later mumbles that they, "deplore the murder of civilians on both sides." Perhaps the Palestinians have a point, and so to set the record straight, I do hereby denounce the following in the name of the Jewish People: 1. All Jewish suicide bombers who have ever acted against Arabs. 2. All Arab buses blown up by Jews. 3. All Arab pizza parlors, malls, discotheques and restaurants destroyed by Jewish terrorists. 4. All airplanes hijacked by Jews since 1903. 5. All Ramadan feasts targeted by Jewish bombs. 6. All Arabs lynched in Israeli cities; all Arab Olympic athletes murdered by Jews; all Arab embassies bombed by Jews. 7. All mosques, cemeteries and religious schools fire bombed or desecrated by Jews in North Africa, France, Belgium, Germany, England or any other country. 8. The destruction of American military, governmental and civilian institutions in Kenya, Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Yemen - along with the murder of U.S. Marines and diplomatic personnel. 9. All Jewish school books which claim that Arabs poison wells, use Christian blood to bake pita, control world finance, and murdered Jesus; or that Arab elders meet secretly to plot a world takeover. 10. And I am particularly ashamed at the way my fellow Jews attacked the World Trade Center, Pentagon and civilian aircraft on September 11, and danced in the streets to celebrate the act. Prof. Stephen Berger Tel Aviv Medical Center |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: Little Hawk Date: 30 Apr 02 - 02:27 PM Professor, he who has a powerful army and air force, and total military superiority on the battlefield needs no suicide bombers in order to massacre and terrorize his opponents, nor does he need to hijack airplanes. Instead, he sends his military jets and bombs the hell of someone. The USA and its Allies lost more people (a handful) to "friendly fire" during the Gulf War than they did to Iraqui fire, while causing the immediate death of at least 200,000 Iraquis with consummate ease, plus the slow death of hundreds of thousands more in the years following. In such a situation, who needs to go after buses or Olympic athletes? Why send people to kill swat a few mosquitoes when you can safely and without personal loss obliterate the entire modern infrastructure of a country from 20,000 feet up? If you chaps had no effective army or air force, if your people were economically devastated, and huddling powerlessly in refugee camps, then you too would do sneaky things like blowing up buses...I guarantee it. Your courageous fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto in 1944 had to resort to sneak attacks on the Nazis, didn't they? They did not have the luxury of maneuvering in the open with panzer divisions and fleets of bombers. The Germans considered them to be "terrorists", of course...lawless people to be exterminated on sight. The powerful always call the powerless some nasty name like "terrorist". It is your own unwillingness to admit to Israel's having greatly contributed to the Middle Eastern cycle of violence that you should be ashamed of. Both Israelis and Palestinians are to blame for that. The fact that they both point their fingers eternally at the other party, while excusing their own violent acts, is typical human hypocrisy, no worse in their case than in yours but equally comparable. You shouldn't be arguing with Carol. You should be arguing with some militant Muslim fanatic whose mind is as closed as yours, and then see whose litany of past grievances is more horrendous and lasts longer. I predict that neither one of you would ever reach the end of it...nor would you reach any degree of understanding regarding the other's point of view or his humanity. And that is why you see fit to kill each other...by whatever means is in your grasp. By the way, I think your media is biased...just a little. It tells you what it wants you to hear, and no more than that. It's just like that on the Palestinian side of the line too... If you had been born a Palestinian, you would BE on the other side of that line. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST,Bakunin Date: 30 Apr 02 - 02:36 PM Well said Prof. Berger....
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST,Ard Mhacha Date: 30 Apr 02 - 02:41 PM Guest at the top of the thread, the Dublin-Monaghan bombings were the worst atrocities carried out in the troubles. On another thread you will read that the British are trying their best to supress all of the evidence of their role in the bombings . Ard Mhacha.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 30 Apr 02 - 06:19 PM The numbers speak for themselves. More than three Palestinians killed for every Israeli killed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 30 Apr 02 - 06:20 PM I guess that means that a Palestinian is only one-third of a human being. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: Troll Date: 01 May 02 - 12:53 AM click here troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: Troll Date: 01 May 02 - 12:56 AM Lets try again.click here troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 01 May 02 - 01:10 AM That post (01-May-02 - 12:56 AM) looks like an attempt to build Israel up by tearing the Palestinians down.
But I know that if I post something giving a different side of the issue in that link to "level the playing field", I'm going to be accused of all kinds of nasty things. Because only people posting bad things about Palestinians and good things about Israel are allowed to post. On the other hand, I could post something positive about an Israeli, and be accused of anti-semitism for that, too, as I was recently on another thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: Troll Date: 01 May 02 - 01:17 AM Some days ya just can't win. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 01 May 02 - 01:25 AM It's true. Some days you can't. But I think if you were acting as a spokesperson for my ethnic or religious group, I would probably want to tell you to stop. I think my people would consider what you're doing an embarassment, whether or not you were doing it on our behalf. But everybody's different. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 01 May 02 - 01:52 AM ...forgot this part: But you're not Jewish, and neither am I. And although I think I would still find you an embarassment even if I was Jewish, I'm not, so I'm not really in a position to say. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 01 May 02 - 03:29 AM Ah, what the hell. I'm not going to let a little bit of emotional blackmail shut me up.
This is a small sampling of what I found when I did a Google search with the key words: "ratio" + "killed" + "Israel" + "Palestinian"
Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting
This, by the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem (a small excerpt from the article in contained in the above link).
The devastating human toll of such "retaliations" makes these imbalances all the more striking. According to the latest estimates from the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem, 897 of the Palestinians killed from September 29, 2000 though March 30, 2002 have been civilians. Israeli security forces killed 823 of those 897 people, including 192 children. B'Tselem records that 253 Israeli civilians were killed by Palestinians in the same period, including 48 children. At least 16 of those 253 people were killed by Palestinian National Authority security forces or persons reportedly linked to them. B'Tselem notes that these figures include neither suicide bombers nor Palestinians who "died after medical treatment was delayed" by Israeli forces.
some more of the same or similar
And this one from Jews for Peace in Palestine and Israel
"Even if you are at war with a city… you must not destroy its trees." (Deut 20: 19-20)
Since September 28th, 2000 and as of April 18th, 2001:
Number of olive trees and fruit trees uprooted by the Israeli army: 25,000
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 01 May 02 - 04:56 AM I like the motto that the group, Jews for Peace in Palestine and Israel uses... Let us not be the ones to say, "We saw, and we kept silent".
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST Date: 01 May 02 - 08:01 AM IDF making an arrest |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: GUEST Date: 01 May 02 - 09:06 AM Thanks for that link, guest 8:01. I guess that pretty much explains why the Israelis refuse to cooperate with the UN delegation investigating the war crimes claims. There are likely more photos like this, damning the actions of the Israeli occupation force they don't want to see on American television. It is, IMO, a human rights violation on the part of the mainstream media not to show these pictures, despite misgivings about sources and all that. Of course, there wasn't all that much outrage when the little Palestinian boy crouching alongside a wall beside his father, was shot by the IDF in the early days of the intifada, either. Palestinian lives don't seem to be worth as much as Israeli lives to the world at large, do they? It is just so terribly sad. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: Troll Date: 01 May 02 - 09:53 PM GUEST 8:01, the photo is a clumsy fake. If you will look at the soldiers in the three upper photos, and the people in the lower photos, you will see that they are not the eame people; different clothing and weapons. Nice try but no cigar. GUEST9:06, there was an article in one of the news mags and also on line showing an after-the-fact mock-up of the positions of the child and his father, the IDF and whoever else was shooting. The fields of fire and the angles were wrong for the child to have been killed by the IDF. I also read -but can't recall where because it's been a while- that a ballistic test on the bullet that killed the child was from an AK47, a weapon that is not used by the IDF. Since I cannot provide documentation, I don't expect you to believe it but... Carol, I meant that I can't win. I thought that you would be pleased to learn that there were not hundreds of Palestinian bodies lying in the rubble. But apparently not. Anyhow, here's more on the subject. click here Why would you consider me an embarassment, Carol? Because I refuse to see things YOUR way? You are right about one thing, I am not a Jew. Why don't you read a little history and find out what happened to those Gentiles in WWII who were married to Jews? If they come for my wife and son, they'll come for me too. So I'll continue to be an "embarrasment" to those whose positions I disagree with by trying to point out the OTHER side. BTW, I have no idea who you are accusing of "emotional blackmail". Far be it from me to try to shut you up. You have a perfect right to express your opinion in any way you see fit. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 01 May 02 - 09:58 PM If they came for your wife and son, they might come for my son as well. I think you're too free with your accusations of anti-semitism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 01 May 02 - 10:20 PM It would please me if there were not hundreds of dead bodies under the rubble in Jenin. However, that wouldn't erase the deaths of hundreds, if not thousands of Palestinian civilians who have been killed by the IDF in past years. During the peroid between September 28th, 2000 and April 18th, 2001, the percentage of Palestinians killed who were civilians was 89%. And it wouldn't change the fact that there have been more that three Palestinians killed for every Israeli killed. Check out the numbers posted on the subject above. And I'll try to find some more for you if those aren't enough. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: Troll Date: 01 May 02 - 10:44 PM I wasn't accusing ANYONE of Anti-Semitism and I'll DEFY you to show me the sentence where I did. As far as the numbers of this and the percentages of that are concerned, there is a war going on. Wars are not fair. There are no umpires standing by saying "OK. Now this side has to have 500 casulties to even things up." Yes, the death ratio is 3 to 1. Do you know why? Because the Palestinians are fighting a modern army using hand weapons and their leaders encourage it. To my mind, this doesn't say a whole lot for the Palestinian leaders, who seem prepared to let their people live in camps and die for no gain rather than accept any compromise. They were offered 70% of the country in 1937 and over 50% in 1948 and the Oslo agreement was axed and the Intifada began. But you know all this. Why do you think the Palestinian leaders have refused to accept any compromise? troll BTW If your sons father was Jewish and you are not, he is not considered Jewish. Only the child of a Jewish mother is considered Jewish. Unless, of course, he converts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Who Are the Terrorists? Part II From: CarolC Date: 02 May 02 - 12:12 AM I wasn't accusing ANYONE of Anti-Semitism and I'll DEFY you to show me the sentence where I did
It sure looks like that's what you were suggesting with this post...
You were already acting as a PR agent for the Palestinians when you started quoting some of the people you mentioned, Yossi Bielin in particular. In fact, I seem to recall a post wherein you said that you saw him on TV and that, "he's a cutie." Although, in all fairness, I know that you wouldn't support Arafat because of his good looks. It is also indicative of prior bias to note that the "extraordinary Israelis" that you are attracted to are all from one end of the political spectrum. You don't seem to have any affinity for those who think that Sharon hasn't gone far enough and that all the Arabs should be expelled from "the river to the sea." Most Israelis do not agree with that stance but neither are they in favor of appeasment. What a shame that you seem to feel that the ideas of ordinary Israelis are unworthy of your consideration: that only those ideas that parallel your own are valid. I'm quite sure that Bielin and Co. didn't have to do much shaping to solidify your stance.
Israel agreed to the Oslo agreement, and it was Israel who reneged on it. Why won't Israel live up to it's agreements?
We have a skeleton, we didn't complete the house. The Oslo agreement has had a rather short occasion to implement itself, and that was between 1993 and 1996. The Oslo agreement was stopped in 1996 when the government in Israel was changed and Mr. Netanyahu became the Prime Minister. I think that the foundations and the structure of Oslo are still the best ones available. And once we shall have an opportunity, we shall complete the building that may withstand the winds of the outside world, and the skepticism of the people.
--Shimon Peres
This site should help you understand why the "generous offer" by Barak was not so generous...
And according to some of the people who were a part of the Camp David peace process, the failure of that process was not the fault of any one person or nation...
And according to Yitzhak Rabin, Arafat and the PLO were willing to work with him in stopping terrorism. (This was during the time when the Palestinians still had hope because they thought the Oslo agreement would be implemented)...
"In the last two years, not one Israeli has been killed by PLO terrorism," Rabin said. The real threat, he said, does not come from Israel's old adversaries - he pointedly included Syrian President Hafez al-Assad in the faded threat category - but from "the ugly wave of" Iranian-supported Islamic fundamentalism.
And this from the Washington Post...
Though Arafat in the weeks before the summit had been looking for the Israelis to carry out their interim agreements before taking up a permanent settlement, he had agreed to go to Camp David on several conditions. One was that he would not be blamed for the possible failure of what he believed was a premature summit. Malley and Agha say Clinton volunteered that the United States would remain neutral in the case of a failure.
Yet when the talks collapsed, Clinton put top priority on helping Barak, whose considerable concessions had undercut his political standing at home. BTW If your sons father was Jewish and you are not, he is not considered Jewish. Only the child of a Jewish mother is considered Jewish. Unless, of course, he converts. My son's father isn't Jewish, but we're pretty sure he has some Jewish ancestry (my ex-husband's father's father). Did the Nazis abide by the mother rule when they were rounding up Jews? And how much Jewish ancestry was enough to get people killed? I'm not too worried about it, but the thought has crossed my mind more than once. |
